Bradley Simmons v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedAugust 16, 2023
DocketA23A0775
StatusPublished

This text of Bradley Simmons v. State (Bradley Simmons v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bradley Simmons v. State, (Ga. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

FOURTH DIVISION DILLARD, P. J., RICKMAN and PIPKIN, JJ.

NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules

August 16, 2023

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A23A0775. SIMMONS v. THE STATE.

DILLARD, Presiding Judge.

Bradley Simmons entered into a negotiated guilty plea to a charge of sexual

battery in 2018, and the trial court sentenced him to serve five years in prison. Two

years later, he filed a motion to set aside or correct a void sentence, arguing that his

sentence violated OCGA § 16-6-22.1 (c). After a hearing, the trial court denied the

motion. Simmons now appeals that ruling. And for the following reasons, we vacate

his sentence and remand this case to the trial court for resentencing.

On June 6, 2016, the State charged Simmons, via indictment, with child

molestation and sexual battery. The child-molestation charge (Count 1) alleged that

on February 10, 2016, Simmons “did commit an indecent act to [B. H.], a child under

the age of 16 years, with the intent to satisfy the sexual desires of himself by rubbing his penis on the child’s buttocks . . . .” The sexual-battery charge (Count 2) concerned

a different victim and alleged that, on the same day, Simmons “did intentionally make

physical contact with the intimate parts of the body of [K. H.], without consent of said

person, by fondling the victim’s vagina . . . .”

Then, on February 26, 2018 (following negotiations with the State), Simmons

agreed to plead guilty to the sexual-battery charge, and the State agreed to nolle pros

the child-molestation charge. During the plea hearing, the trial court approved the

negotiated guilty plea, determined that Simmons’s guilty plea was knowing and

voluntary, and recounted the facts alleged in the indictment’s sexual-battery charge.

Simmons admitted to the facts as charged in Count 2 and pleaded guilty, after which

the trial court imposed the sentence of five years agreed to by the parties.

More than two years later, Simmons filed a motion to set aside a void sentence.

In doing so, he argued that his five-year sentence for felony sexual battery was void

because the victim (K. H.) was not under the age of 16 at the time the offense

occurred; and as a result, he should have been sentenced for misdemeanor sexual

battery. The trial court then held a hearing on the matter, prior to which Simmons and

the State filed a joint stipulation that K. H.’s date of birth was April 11,

2 1999—meaning that K. H. was 16 years old on the date of the offense alleged in the

indictment.

During the hearing, the State argued that there had possibly been a

misunderstanding as to whether Simmons was pleading guilty to sexual battery as a

lesser-included offense to the child-molestation charge in Count 1 of the indictment.

Even so, because Simmons believed he was pleading guilty to a felony, the State

contended he should be held to the bargain struck between the parties. Simmons, on

the other hand, testified that while he did think he was pleading guilty to a felony, he

was not pleading to a lesser-included offense of Count 1 concerning B. H., but rather

to the sexual-battery charge in Count 2 concerning K. H.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court took the matter under

advisement. But one month later, the court issued an order denying Simmons’s

motion to set aside, concluding “the revelation that the named victim was 16 years of

age at the time of the offense does not affect the validity of Defendant’s guilty plea

and does not render the sentence imposed void.” The court further determined that

Simmons “waived his defense that the victim’s age prohibited his conviction for

felony sexual battery by entering a valid guilty plea.” This appeal follows.

3 In his sole enumeration of error, Simmons maintains the trial court erred in

denying his motion to set aside a void sentence, arguing that he should have been

sentenced for misdemeanor sexual battery because the victim was not under the age

of 16 at the time of the offense. We agree.

In the context of a criminal conviction, a sentence is void if “the court imposes

punishment that the law does not allow.”1 And such a sentence may be vacated at

“any time in any court where it becomes material to the interest of the parties to

consider it.”2 Indeed, to allow the defendant to “serve a sentence for a criminal

conviction that has been identified as illegal and void would not comport with

fundamental fairness and due process of law.”3 Furthermore, and importantly, this is

true even for defendants who plead guilty because a defendant who “knowingly

1 von Thomas v. State, 293 Ga. 569, 571 (2) (748 SE2d 446) (2013) (punctuation omitted); accord Rooney v. State, 287 Ga. 1, 2 (2) (690 SE2d 804) (2010). 2 Little v. State, 327 Ga. App. 252, 253 (758 SE2d 133) (2014) (punctuation omitted); see von Thomas, 293 Ga. at 571 (2) (explaining that “a sentencing court has jurisdiction to vacate a void sentence at any time”); Phillip v. State, 313 Ga. App. 302, 302 (721 SE2d 214) (2011) (noting a trial court has no jurisdiction to modify a sentence after the term of court ends, but when a sentence is void . . . the court may resentence the defendant at any time). 3 Nazario v. State, 293 Ga. 480, 487 (2) (c) (746 SE2d 109) (2013); accord Bynes v. State, 336 Ga. App. 223, 227-28 (2) (784 SE2d 71) (2016).

4 enters into a plea agreement does not waive the right to challenge an illegal and void

sentence.”4

Turning to the relevant statute, OCGA § 16-6-22.1 (b) provides that “[a] person

commits the offense of sexual battery when he or she intentionally makes physical

contact with the intimate parts of the body of another person without the consent of

that person.”5 And subsection (c) of this statute further provides that “[e]xcept as

otherwise provided in this Code section, a person convicted of the offense of sexual

battery shall be punished as for a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature.”6 In

stark contrast, under subsection (d), “[a] person convicted of the offense of sexual

4 Bell v. State, 294 Ga. 5, 8 (2) (749 SE2d 672) (2013); see Nazario, 293 Ga. at 487 (2) (c) (noting that a guilty plea does not waive a challenge to an illegal sentence); see also Humphrey v. State, 297 Ga. 349, 350 (773 SE2d 760) (2015) (“[A]s we have indicated in a number of cases, the consent of the parties cannot validate a void sentence.”). 5 See Watson v. State, 297 Ga. 718, 719 (2) (777 SE2d 677) (2015) (explaining that the three elements required to establish the offense of sexual battery are “(1) physical contact with the victim’s intimate body parts; (2) intent to have such contact; and (3) lack of consent on the part of the victim”). 6 See OCGA § 17-10-4 (a) (“A person who is convicted of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $5,000.00 or by confinement in the county or other jail, county correctional institution, or such other places as counties may provide for maintenance of county inmates, for a term not to exceed 12 months, or both . . . .”).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Arnold v. State
628 S.E.2d 605 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2006)
Hernandez v. State
686 S.E.2d 373 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Zipperer v. State
683 S.E.2d 865 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Rooney v. State
690 S.E.2d 804 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2010)
Humphrey v. State
773 S.E.2d 760 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2015)
Watson v. State
777 S.E.2d 677 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2015)
Bynes v. the State
784 S.E.2d 71 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2016)
SULLINS v. the STATE.
820 S.E.2d 468 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2018)
Nazario v. State
746 S.E.2d 109 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
von Thomas v. State
748 S.E.2d 446 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Bell v. State
749 S.E.2d 672 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Phillip v. State
721 S.E.2d 214 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2011)
Little v. State
758 S.E.2d 133 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bradley Simmons v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradley-simmons-v-state-gactapp-2023.